Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,322

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A Comparison of Coronary Angioplasty with Fibrinolytic Therapy in Acute Myocardial Infarction

Open access
Andersen, Henning R., Nielsen, Torsten T., Rasmussen, Klaus, Thuesen, Leif, Kelbaek, Henning, Thayssen, Per, Abildgaard, Ulrik, Pedersen, Flemming, Madsen, Jan K., Grande, Peer, Villadsen, Anton B., Krusell, Lars R., Haghfelt, Torben, Lomholt, Preben, Husted, Steen E., Vigholt, Else, Kjaergard, Henrik K., Mortensen, Leif Spange·2003·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: For the treatment of myocardial infarction with ST-segment elevation, primary angioplasty is considered superior to fibrinolysis for patients who are admitted to hospitals with angioplasty facilities. Whether this benefit is maintained for patients who require transportation from a community hospital to a center where invasive treatment is available is uncertain. METHODS: We randomly assigned 1572 patients with acute myocardial infarction to treatment with angioplasty or accelerated treatment with intravenous alteplase; 1129 patients were enrolled at 24 referral hospitals and 443 patients at 5 invasive-treatment centers. The primary study end point was a composite of death, clinical evidence of reinfarction, or disabling stroke at 30 days. RESULTS: Among patients who underwent randomization at referral hospitals, the primary end point was reached in 8.5 percent of the patients in the angioplasty group, as compared with 14.2 percent of those in the fibrinolysis group (P=0.002). The results were similar among patients who were enrolled at invasive-treatment centers: 6.7 percent of the patients in the angioplasty group reached the primary end point, as compared with 12.3 percent in the fibrinolysis group (P=0.05). Among all patients, the better outcome after angioplasty was driven primarily by a reduction in the rate of reinfarction (1.6 percent in the angioplasty group vs. 6.3 percent in the fibrinolysis group, P<0.001); no significant differences were observed in the rate of death (6.6 percent vs. 7.8 percent, P=0.35) or the rate of stroke (1.1 percent vs. 2.0 percent, P=0.15). Ninety-six percent of patients were transferred from referral hospitals to an invasive-treatment center within two hours. CONCLUSIONS: A strategy for reperfusion involving the transfer of patients to an invasive-treatment center for primary angioplasty is superior to on-site fibrinolysis, provided that the transfer takes two hours or less.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejmoa025142

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 1,322

Metadata

Authors
Andersen, H. R., Nielsen, T. T., Rasmussen, K., Thuesen, L., Kelbaek, H., Thayssen, P., Abildgaard, U., Pedersen, F., Madsen, J. K., Grande, P., Villadsen, A. B., Krusell, L. R., Haghfelt, T., Lomholt, P., Husted, S. E., Vigholt, E., Kjaergard, H. K., & Mortensen, L. S.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2003-08-21
Volume
349
Issue
8
Pages
733-742
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2006556834
Cited by
1,322
References
0
FWCI
64.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Comparison of Coronary Angioplasty with Fibrinolytic Therapy in Acute Myocardial Infarction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmoa025142
The paper
Andersen, H. R., Nielsen, T. T., Rasmussen, K., Thuesen, L., Kelbaek, H., Thayssen, P., Abildgaard, U., Pedersen, F., Madsen, J. K., Grande, P., Villadsen, A. B., Krusell, L. R., Haghfelt, T., Lomholt, P., Husted, S. E., Vigholt, E., Kjaergard, H. K., & Mortensen, L. S. (2003). A Comparison of Coronary Angioplasty with Fibrinolytic Therapy in Acute Myocardial Infarction. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa025142

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.